jonpais

@Thpriest How are you shooting with a Nokton at f/1.2 in bright sunshine? Are you using three ND filters?

Botany Bay is lovely. Not only the lens, but the photo style, the camera settings (sharpening, contrast, saturation and noise reduction), the subject matter, the location, the lighting, the focus transitions, the choice of aperture, editing and the music all contribute to the overall feel. Makes you think twice before upgrading, doesn't it?

Kidzrevil takes my words out of context, then says they confirm his suspicion that [...]. This is not even logical. First of all, I say that the digitally corrected lenses I use produce beautiful images, then this somehow proves the opposite is the case with the fine Panasonic 20mm f/1.7? And to shout 'eureka!', as if this were the first time he definitively learned that m43 lenses are corrected in firmware? This is common knowledge, not something hidden away in the cellar of an inn in Turin.

? I have seldom seen such oversharpened images as the ones you shared the other day, and I have my own suspicions that it's not the lens or camera to blame.

No question there, about the results being specific to the set of lenses I chose to compare. I still have trouble wrapping my head around the words clinical and organic though, and next to no reputable lens reviewers that I know of use this terminology when interpreting the results of their tests of such things as bokeh, flare, resolution, chromatic aberration, barrel and pincushion distortion and so on. Then again, they are reviewers, not artists or poets! The same lens, be it a Leica Summilux C or Zeiss Master prime, in the hands of two different shooters, will also give very different looks, depending on such things as lighting, white balance and exposure; camera settings such as picture profile, contrast and sharpening; as well as composition, grading, etc. It is often said that m43 lenses, because their optical defects are corrected by the camera's firmware, are too clinical looking, but according to my own experience, the Leica 12mm and 42.5 yield extraordinarily beautiful images. Some too believe that 4K is disturbingly sharp and unforgiving, but I continue to find an overwhelming number of videos shot in UHD to be too mushy.

If you place thes camera upside down on the sofa, then cover the LCD with the old sock, then place an sheet of white paper between the LCD screen and the camera body while lifting then camera up by the hot shoe, you should be able to notice as gentle tugging inn the left pant leg of your trousers.

@BTM_Pix I think the answer is, most have never shot video with these cameras. Same with the higher end models: one man I know here who owns a Sony a7r II, he's never shot video with it, and a buddy of mine here who's got the X-T2, has never shot a second of video. I seldom come across any casual shooters who are even remotely interested in shooting video.

This is exactly why I've never bought a Sony. Just one thing after another. Thank goodness the a9 is perfect though.

It is unable to display .95 on the EVF. I'm quite certain there is nothing wrong with either your camera or lens.

You might say that!

I have never used the Voigtlander 10.5mm, but according to Lenstip, the lens is a resounding failure. Among the list of cons: weak image quality on the edge of the field of view, huge vignetting, monstrous coma, high astigmatism, visible spherical aberration, significant field curvature, ugly out of focus areas, field of view over two degrees narrower than stated in the specifications, weak price/optics quality ratio.

As an added bonus, should the OP decide to shoot anamorphic, SLR Magic is there, and I wouldn't be at all surprised, given the popularity of the GH5, if Veydra decided to proceed with their plans to make an anamorphic lens as well.

Agree about investing in glass, but not sure what future proof means. I don't think m43 is going away any time soon. Sigma, Samyang/Rokinon, SLR Magic, Kowa, Voigtlander, DJI, Blackmagic, JVC and Schneider are just a few of the manufacturers who have joined the micro four thirds consortium, which demonstrates great confidence in the future of micro four thirds. Also, since the OP already says he thinks the above videos are wonderful, I'm guessing he doesn't necessarily buy the often repeated phrase that all m43 lenses are too sharp and digital looking. For every over-sharpened video I see shot on m43, I see just as many mushy ones taken with hybrid APS-C cameras. Thankfully, as @TheRenaissanceMan states, there also happen to be several third party manufacturers like Veydra and Voigtlander, whose lenses are not only wholly manual, but also excellent optically. In fact, there are few, if any, manufacturers who build lenses of old-world quality like Voigtlander; I think I recall someone once saying they even purchased a m43 camera because of the Nokton lenses alone. Additionally, some of these full frame lenses approach 1 Kg in weight, whereas a typical Panasonic prime or zoom might be around 300 gr. And as another forum member already said, the light weight of native glass has the added advantage of being able to fly the camera on an inexpensive single handed gimbal as well. Since the OP has said he'll be shooting music videos, I'm assuming a gimbal will come in very handy. Since he's also on a limited budget, a single-handed gimbal costs much less than something like the DJI Ronin. If you shoot with these small primes and zooms, it's very discreet, you can shoot just about anywhere without attracting unwanted attention.

That's an excellent tutorial (as far as I can tell, since I don't own the GX80/85), and I especially appreciate hearing his thoughts beginning at 5 min.

It may be that the GH5 is unable to register .95 or whatever in the EVF (same as other G and GH cameras I've owned) but for sure the lens is faster with the XL, and your metering should work correctly as well. Hope that helps.

I know many here will disagree, but I'd go with native lenses. One of the chief reasons for shooting m43 is its compactness. The lenses Robert John uses are among the very finest in the micro four thirds system. Focusing will also be much faster with native lenses. Whatever you decide, stabilization works fine with adapted lenses, so I wouldn't choose one over the other based solely on stabilization alone.

Thanks, I'll give it a shot.

This is too incredible. Would have many uses for me, since my Macbook Pro doesn't have an SD card reader, and I still haven't picked one up yet. But they don't ship to Vietnam!

Nice. How do you transfer the files to your phone? I'd like to try that myself.

The outstanding 50mm f/1.4 and the 42.5mm f/1.2. The Nocticron wiped the floor with the Sigma. I don't own any 75mm ff equivalent micro four thirds lenses to do a direct comparison.

@BTM_Pix That's pretty awesome.

@mercer I think your wrong, wrong, wrong! hahaha. The pictures look beautiful, and that's not something I usually say about shots of flowers and dogs. FWIW, I really wanted to like the Olympus 25mm f/1.2, I've shot quite a bit with it, but I just couldn't warm up to it. I'll probably give it another go some day, but it just doesn't do much for me.

Yes, it can. IBIS may also be assigned to a Fn button.

I've only done one comparison, between a full frame lens along with the SB XL and a native micro four thirds lens, and for me, the magic was in the native lens, not the adapted one.

There might have been more of a desire for this with the GH4 as it has an extra crop in 4K. Now that the GH5 has no extra crop in 4K and there are several native wide angle zooms starting at 7-8mm available...